EPA Reapproves Highly Controversial Weedkiller Dicamba for GM Crops
In a move that has sparked widespread criticism from environmental groups and advocates, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on Friday reapproved the use of dicamba, a highly contentious weedkiller known to drift and destroy nearby crops. The approval comes despite mounting evidence of its health risks, including an increased risk for certain cancers.
The EPA's decision allows dicamba to be used on genetically modified soybeans and cotton, which are grown by millions of farmers across the United States. Critics argue that this expansion will lead to a significant increase in the use of the pesticide, exacerbating environmental damage and putting public health at risk.
"New restrictions on use are not sufficient, and will perpetuate the chemical treadmill where many farmers are trapped," said Kelly Ryerson, an activist with the Make American Healthy Again movement. The movement has forged a fragile alliance with the Trump administration, but it is clear that the decision is a major disappointment for its advocates.
The EPA's approval of dicamba comes after courts blocked similar efforts in 2020 and 2024 to limit the pesticide's use. However, environmental groups argue that these restrictions are insufficient, citing concerns about dicamba drift and its devastating impact on nearby crops and critical ecosystems.
"Dicamba drift has damaged immense acreage, devastating vegetable farms, trees, and other critical plants," said Nathan Donley, environmental health science director at the Center for Biological Diversity. "When push comes to shove, this administration is willing to bend over backward to appease the pesticide industry, regardless of the consequences to public health or the environment."
Research has linked dicamba exposure to an increased risk for certain cancers, including liver cancer and a type of leukemia affecting the blood and bone marrow. The EPA's own research has highlighted the risks associated with dicamba, but critics argue that these findings have been largely ignored in the agency's decision-making process.
Bayer, the manufacturer of dicamba, will now seek state approvals for the pesticide's use on genetically modified crops. The company has promised to launch training programs for applicators in the coming weeks, despite concerns from environmental groups about the effectiveness and safety of these measures.
The American Soybean Association welcomed the EPA's decision, citing the need for clear rules that would help farmers prepare for the next growing season and control destructive weeds. However, this argument rings hollow when compared to the overwhelming evidence of dicamba's harm to human health and the environment.
As the debate over dicamba continues to rage, one thing is clear: the EPA's reapproval of this highly contentious weedkiller will have far-reaching consequences for farmers, consumers, and the environment.
In a move that has sparked widespread criticism from environmental groups and advocates, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on Friday reapproved the use of dicamba, a highly contentious weedkiller known to drift and destroy nearby crops. The approval comes despite mounting evidence of its health risks, including an increased risk for certain cancers.
The EPA's decision allows dicamba to be used on genetically modified soybeans and cotton, which are grown by millions of farmers across the United States. Critics argue that this expansion will lead to a significant increase in the use of the pesticide, exacerbating environmental damage and putting public health at risk.
"New restrictions on use are not sufficient, and will perpetuate the chemical treadmill where many farmers are trapped," said Kelly Ryerson, an activist with the Make American Healthy Again movement. The movement has forged a fragile alliance with the Trump administration, but it is clear that the decision is a major disappointment for its advocates.
The EPA's approval of dicamba comes after courts blocked similar efforts in 2020 and 2024 to limit the pesticide's use. However, environmental groups argue that these restrictions are insufficient, citing concerns about dicamba drift and its devastating impact on nearby crops and critical ecosystems.
"Dicamba drift has damaged immense acreage, devastating vegetable farms, trees, and other critical plants," said Nathan Donley, environmental health science director at the Center for Biological Diversity. "When push comes to shove, this administration is willing to bend over backward to appease the pesticide industry, regardless of the consequences to public health or the environment."
Research has linked dicamba exposure to an increased risk for certain cancers, including liver cancer and a type of leukemia affecting the blood and bone marrow. The EPA's own research has highlighted the risks associated with dicamba, but critics argue that these findings have been largely ignored in the agency's decision-making process.
Bayer, the manufacturer of dicamba, will now seek state approvals for the pesticide's use on genetically modified crops. The company has promised to launch training programs for applicators in the coming weeks, despite concerns from environmental groups about the effectiveness and safety of these measures.
The American Soybean Association welcomed the EPA's decision, citing the need for clear rules that would help farmers prepare for the next growing season and control destructive weeds. However, this argument rings hollow when compared to the overwhelming evidence of dicamba's harm to human health and the environment.
As the debate over dicamba continues to rage, one thing is clear: the EPA's reapproval of this highly contentious weedkiller will have far-reaching consequences for farmers, consumers, and the environment.
. I mean, everyone knows that genetically modified crops are the future of farming and we need every tool at our disposal to fight those pesky weeds. The environmental damage is just part of the price we pay for progress and innovation. And let's be real, if people really cared about their health as much as they say they do, they'd be eating more GM soybeans and less organic kale 
.
They're just lettin' loose a toxic chemical that's gonna mess up our planet for good! I mean, I get it, farms need to be taken care of and all that jazz, but at what cost?! The health risks from dicamba are real, like, serious stuff - increased cancer risk, yeah no thanks 
. And don't even get me started on the environmental damage... devastating ecosystems, destroyin' crops... it's a mess! 
. The EPA's got to do better, or else we're gonna be facin' some serious consequences 
the epa's decision to reapprove dicamba for use on gm crops is super concerning 
plus, all these health risks are really scary - cancer, liver damage... the list goes on 
i'm not saying farmers don't need help controlling weeds, but is this really the best solution? 
what about the environment? it's already struggling as it is 
.
.
. I'm not surprised that the American Soybean Association is happy about this decision though - they're basically just looking out for their own interests and don't care about the bigger picture 
.
.
]
. Restrictions are just not enough when it comes to something as toxic as dicamba. We need real action, not just some token attempts to appease the pesticide industry 
. I mean, have they not seen the damage it's causin'? Trees gettin' destroyed, veggie farms dyin', people's lives at risk... what's next? 
. And now they're talkin' about trainin' programs for applicators, yeah right! Like that's gonna make a difference 
that shows it can be super bad for people's health and the environment 
. We need stricter regulations, not more loopholes for the pesticide industry to exploit 
i mean, think about it, dicamba has been around for ages and ppl were still using it, right? so maybe this is just a step forward in how the gov is trying to help farmers out? plus, research shows that farmers are already finding ways to minimize drift and protect their crops. that's gotta count for something! 
so, maybe this is a chance for the gov to make some adjustments and find a balance between farm safety and the planet? 
It's so sad that environmental groups are speaking out against this move because it's all about profits over people and the planet 
️ The only thing that really matters is lining the pockets of corporate interests. Can't wait to see how this plays out in the courts! 
I'm so worried about these new rules on dicamba. Won't they just keep making our air and water dirty? 
We already know it's bad for crops and wildlife... how can we be sure that trains are even safe to use in the future?